The need for an amicable debt settlement
Exactly a week ago I was able to put an end to the long-drawn-out situation in which my customer had already been for about 4 four years. Now you will think, then you could have done a little better…. I will therefore briefly outline what was going on. A couple from the Randstad reported to me 4 years ago. For several years they had run a restaurant in the form of a partnership company with a friend / associate. As a result of the economic crisis, they had much less income, people stopped eating and meeting rooms were no longer rented. Income fell so hard that they felt the need to say goodbye to the company. Unfortunately, it was not possible to stop the company without having to sell their business premises and dismiss the staff.
During the intake interview it turned out that one of the creditors had filed for bankruptcy for both the company and the partners. And here the first hitch sneaked. We were allowed to work for the couple, the other partner had to turn to his municipality. Normally this is of course no problem at all and it is handled very skilfully. During this period, however, courts began to think that bankruptcy was no longer a reason to immediately file an application for the Wsnp (Debt Rescheduling Natural Persons Act) and that an amicable process should be carried out.
For the couple in question, we have applied for a postponement from the court to try to reach an amicable settlement with all creditors. We have got this time. The file was started, the verification started and a proposal was submitted to all creditors. However, the attempt was to no avail and in the end we had to submit a request for admission to the WSNP. The couple were admitted to the WSNP in June 2014 and have now successfully completed the scheme (clean sheet).
Now my point about the amicable process. The other partner did not fare well. A request for admission to the WSNP was filed with him in court without attempting an amicable process. Unfortunately, this cost him dearly. His petition was denied and he was declared bankrupt. During the bankruptcy, two attempts were made to get him into the WSNP, but this was also unsuccessful because no amicable attempt was made.
In June 2016, the partner still reported to us and we were able to do our work, the bankruptcy was closed in December 2016 and we were able to submit the proposal to all creditors in January. This led to Wednesday, the day on which the compulsory agreement was discussed. After so many years, an end date came to light, and during the hearing we were told that the petition had been granted and that this misery had come to an end.
If an amicable process had been started for this man a few years ago, he would have now been ready, now he still has to start the three years of Wsnp, but the end is in sight.
Kelly Vinck